Posted on 09/14/2015 9:49:02 AM PDT by MarvinStinson
“Just because you buy the front house, doesn’t mean you own the beach,” says Tony Salaza. “The beach is for everybody.”
He gestures towards a sweep of architect-designed houses to his left.
Over the past few years, many of Malibu’s 13,000 residents have been watching with alarm as public access rights to the 27-mile coastline have come under threat.
Many celebrities and multimillionaires own sprawling Malibu homes overlooking the Pacific, including actors Robert Redford and Angelina Jolie, the rapper Dr Dre, the director Rob Reiner and media mogul David Geffen. In an effort to protect their privacy, some homeowners have now taken matters into their own hands by employing security guards to patrol the sands in front of their houses.
Twice in the past few weeks, members of the public have been asked to leave Malibu’s Escondido Beach by a uniformed security guard who wrongly claimed they were on private property and threatened them with a fine for trespassing.
That area is treated as a private riviera … the most egregious example of privatisation of public land in Los Angeles.
Of late wealthy homeowners have taken to erecting their own “No trespassing” signs and putting out traffic cones to discourage people from parking their cars. The hiring of private security guards is the newest skirmish in a long-running battle.
Noaki Schwartz of the California Coastal Commission, tested the waters herself with her six-year-old daughter and a friend. Within minutes of sitting on the sand, says Schwartz, a uniformed guard with a clipboard walked over.
“He was polite but pretty firm and said I was trespassing and needed to leave and if I didn’t leave, I would be fined $1,500 and probably get a citation for trespassing.”
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
The city government has tried to force homeowners to “donate” strips of land by refusing to give permits for home improvements. (new kitchen etc)
it was ruled a taking by regulation.
The city should just buy a house when it comes up for sale.
> Sorry safety does not trump freedom.
Absolutely. If they’re so worried about their safety, they can afford to have one of those “shelter-in-place” rooms built into their mansions.
Terrible law, much better is Texas law that property ownership stops at the vegetation line. You do not own the sand in Texas, the public does. However if there is no access to the beach for all practical purposes it’s your beach. Texas does allow driving on the beach, which IMHO is not such a good thing.
Incorrect. The way it works around Puget Sound is your property line includes the beach at low tide.
California may have a right to passage for the public on most beach areas, but honestly most of these areas are secluded, gated with guards and no public parking nearby. In order for someone to excersize their “rights” they’d have to go through a lot of trouble which brings their motivation into question.
The most obvious solution is to not live there, if that is your concern.
Billionaires have a tough life.
Yep. Dunno anything about the other names mentioned, but redford is a flaming liberal and a first class prick. He got his but doesn't want anybody else to get theirs.
Not only that...but most of these celebrities fought for politicians and issues that would make sure that it wasn't their back yard.
Then don't claim the entire Pacific Ocean for your back yard. Put up a fence at the property line.
You think those people know about property lines? It's where your property ends and somebody else's begins.
Maybe they don't know. It's one way to become mega-rich.
This isn’t about their safety; this is about the unwashed (net worth only $5 million) spoiling the view.
I Looked at a piece of property a few years ago on Willapa Bay. The owner claimed the property line was 200 feet beyond the water line.
Not true at all. The private stretches of Malibu are interspersed with public stretches. Broad Beach, one of the prime conflict areas (and where Redford lived--he sold it a while back), is immediately adjacent to Zuma Beach, a massive county park that runs a couple of miles.
Here's a picture of Broad Beach and Zuma Beach to Point Dume. The Broad Beach neighborhood, by the way, is not gated and guarded.
Beaches are part of the ocean. By definition. At high tide you can be there in a boat. At low tide you're standing on dry sand. Same place. Who has jurisdiction to close the ocean?
Redford - a Communist
Jolie - a psycho
Dr. Dre - a thug
Reiner - another Communist
Geffen - a fag
Nice bunch of degenerates.
Or have a friend drop them off and pick them up (eliminating need to find parking).
Alternately, a boat service that dropped people off from the seaward side might also work.
“Halt! Oh, it’s you, Miss Streisand. My apologies. Just wanted to be sure there were no, um, trespassers on the beach at night. By the way, the Sheriff asked me to thank you for buying all those tickets to the Benevolent fund Raffle. Good night, Miss Streisand.”
(Backs out while bowing respectfully.)
Those elites really do think they own the whole beach, don’t they?
When it comes to waterfront property-let the buyer beware-and read the small print. I live in a remote rural area-it is 20 miles to the nearest town, which has less than 900 people. The back of the properties on this side of the road are along the riverbank-and there are tourists all over the place in summer, crashing small boats and jet skis into the rocks on rapids, having drunken parties on the riverbank, and occasionally drowning in the river after some foolish stunt.
I love the area I live in, but it is redneck and trashy-downriver there are big, fancy houses, but since the river and bank are PUBLIC property, those fancy people put up with the same noise and nonsense that we peasants do. The people who live in those ritzy enclaves have whined, complained to the county, called sheriff’s deputies, etc many times over the years-a couple of them fenced off the riverbank and put up no trespassing signs-both were taken down by one of the game wardens within 48 hours-and the property owners fined for obstructing access to a public place.
If someone doesn’t like having public access next to their property, don’t buy on a body of water that belongs to everyone...
And I don't care if they don't like the hoi polloi wandering around behind their houses. Nobody forced them to purchase property abutting public land. If they don't want to see people, they can build a fence; if you're rich enough to buy beachfront property, you're rich enough to build a fence...And even if they aren't rich enough, well, tough. Not the taxpayers' problem.
“Not to worry — according to these same brilliant, intellectual celebrities, sea level rise caused by global warming will soon wipe out their houses anyway.”
Yes, perhaps not global warming, but a strong storm, and those homeowners won’t mind a bit having other people’s payments into insurance money pay for the repairs or rebuilding when the inevitable damage is done.
“Meathead” has discovered the concept of private property?
Chalk up another sign of the Second Coming!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.